MA: Sex offenders have access to kids on Halloween

Um…do murderers have access to kids on Halloween? Can murderers drive ice cream trucks, go to the park, library, or their child school? So if I understand correctly, murderers are ok, sex offenders are the worst of the worst. What about an adult who killed a child out of hate? Can they give out candy, go to schools, etc.?

Because it was a little difficult to follow in the General Comments threads, I’m going to post the links relating to a possible defamation suit against Wendy Murphy and the newspaper. Note that the subtitle to the article is “No Mass. law to stop monsters with candy.”

Defamation of Groups or Individual Members
Can I defame a group or class of people?
https://www.minclaw.com/legal-resource-center/what-is-defamation/defamation-groups-members/

Publishing Information that Harms Another’s Reputation
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/publishing-information-harms-anothers-reputation

Can i get in trouble for posting sex offenders addresses on public forum
https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-i-get-in-trouble-for-posting-sex-offenders-add-1938220.html

Answer:

“If you are re-posting this information from the government’s sex offender web site, you will be in the clear as that is public information.

“However, if you editorialize in such a manner that crosses the line to defamation or harassment, you could be creating liability for yourself.”

Can An Opinion Be Defamatory?

Labeling a statement an opinion does not automatically make it an opinion or make it safe from the possibility of it being defamatory. If a reader or listener could reasonably understand that the communication as stating a fact that could be verified, the communication will not be considered an opinion, especially if it is sufficiently derogatory to hurt the subject’s reputation. Also, a communication that is presented in the form of an opinion may be considered defamatory if it implies that the opinion is based on defamatory facts that have not been disclosed.

In other words, the fact that a statement is one’s opinion does not necessarily make one immune from a defamation lawsuit.

Expressions of Opinion

An expression of opinion may be “simple” or “mixed.” A “simple” expression of opinion is made after the facts on which the opinion is based are presented. A “mixed” expression of opinion is not accompanied by the facts. They may be implied by the speaker or assumed by those receiving the communication.

This distinction is significant in light of a Supreme Court decision that holds that an expression of opinion cannot be the basis of a defamation action. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., (1974) 418 U.S. 323, 339. If an expression of opinion is based on disclosed, non-defamatory facts, an action is not supported no matter how unreasonable or derogatory the opinion is. However, if the expression of opinion is based on undisclosed or implied facts, support of an action depends on the understanding of the recipient of the statement, since the meaning of a communication is that which the recipient reasonably understands it to be, even if he/she is mistaken in that understanding. So if the recipient reasonably believes the truth of an undisclosed or implied defamatory fact about the subject of a statement, the speaker is liable.
https://www.minclaw.com/legal-resource-center/what-is-defamation/can-opinion-defamatory/

Meaning of the Communication

The meaning of a communication is what the recipient understands the meaning to be. The recipient may be incorrect in that understanding, but if the incorrect interpretation is reasonable, the recipient’s understanding of the communication is taken to be the meaning of that communication. Generally, words are construed according to the meaning a recipient typically gives them. Southard v. Forbes Inc., 588 F.2d 140 (5 Cir. 1979).

Likewise, the recipient’s understanding of the communication determines to whom the communication refers. A defamatory communication must refer to the plaintiff in order for the plaintiff to have a claim, but the reference is determined by the understanding of the recipient, not the intention of the defamer.

The full context of any communication is considered when identifying the meaning of a communication and determining whether it is defamatory. Therefore, two statements could be identical, but if the context is different, one could be defamatory and other not. Hoffman v. Washington Post Co., 433 F.Supp. 600 (D.D.C. 1977). For example, the headline of a newspaper presents a different context than the newspaper article itself, because many people read only the headlines.

The circumstances during which a person is presented the communication may also affect the meaning of the communication and how the person understands it. An otherwise obviously defamatory statement made as a joke to a person or group of people may have been made in circumstances in which no reasonable person would have taken it seriously. In such a case, the statement would not be defamatory.

Elements of Group/Class Defamation

An individual member of a group may be defamed by a statement if:

The group or class is small enough that a reader or listener can reasonably understand that the statement refers to the plaintiff; and
The reader or listener can reasonably infer that the statement refers to the plaintiff based on the circumstances of the publication.

Although the size of the group is not defined by common law, generally plaintiffs have recovered damages when groups have included 25 or fewer people. The circumstances surrounding how the statement is presented has a significant influence on the success of such a claim. A defamatory statement alleging that “most members” of a group of 25 are guilty of bad behavior may defame the members of that group, but the same statement alleging “one member” of the group is guilty of the behavior would probably not be considered defamatory. Neiman-Marcus v. Lait, 13 F.R.D. 311 (S.D.N.Y. 1952)

Source:

Defamation of Groups or Individual Members
Can I defame a group or class of people?
https://www.minclaw.com/legal-resource-center/what-is-defamation/defamation-groups-members/

Fearmongering Article Falsely Claims ‘Halloween Is Christmas for Sex Offenders’
“Pushing for new laws aimed at keeping kids ‘safe’ from ‘sex offenders’ on Halloween is nonsense.”
Lenore Skenazy|Oct. 9, 2018 2:10 pm
https://reason.com/blog/2018/10/09/halloween-sex-offenders-boston-safe

The History and Theory of the Law of Defamation (pointing out that defamation laws were passed in large part to prevent duels and violence, also forms of speech).
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1109121?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents (at least read the last line, lol).

I argue that not taking defamation action when possible is too passive, especially when confronted with the lies and fake news of the press. A little comment to an article is like slapping it with the little finger. One article like the one above is enough to wipe out and render helpless a million words of our resident activist, David Kennerly, a free speech lover. While I would agree that commenting can be helpful and is worth the time, that does not foreclose the use of heavy artillery where possible.

That is not to say and defamation action would succeed. That is yet to be seen. I only suggest further research is needed because it would be a powerful weapon, and like all weapons, it must be understood.

I added some comments at the source article. Please do the same.

What would that article look like if there were 100 comments following it that condemned it?

How about 500? 1,000? There are easily enough of us. Easily. It should be an avalanche.

I will be emailing a long, brass, letter to the editor, the Boston Herald, and all of the groups such as NARSOL, A4CSOL, WAR, FAC and possibly a MA state senator. Everyone will be CCed. I’m not going to let this Bullshit slide. I’m getting really fed up with the endless harassment of people and their families. These bastards propogating the myths and scare mongering need to face jail time.